This is an archive of news stories and research from the National Union of Public and General Employees. Please see our new site - https://nupge.ca - for the most current information.
Ottawa (21 Oct. 2021) — As the Ontario Public Service Employees Union (OPSEU/NUPGE) has warned, privatizing electronic monitoring of offenders could place public safety at risk. But the impact on public safety is not the only reason to be concerned.
In Britain, when electronic monitoring of offenders was privatized, the corporations running the service overcharged the British government and had to repay £189.5 million (about C$320 million). Both companies accepted responsibility for fraud offences and were also fined.
Corporate profits and public safety not compatible
Privatizing corrections services was tried in Ontario when the operation of a correctional facility in Penetanguishene was contracted out. As OPSEU points out, that privatization scheme “failed miserably.”
“In Ontario and in the U.S., private corporations have shown time and time again that they can’t be trusted to put community safety over profits,” said OPSEU/SEFPO President Warren (Smokey) Thomas.
What has happened when correctional services are privatized is similar to what has happened due to privatization in other sectors.
“From Walkerton to the high pandemic death toll in for-profit long-term care, there is plenty of evidence that private companies can’t be trusted to keep us safe. Ontarians must ask if they really want a for-profit company monitoring offenders in the community,” said OPSEU/SEFPO First Vice-President/Treasurer Eduardo (Eddy) Almeida, who is himself a Correctional Officer.
Companies running privatized electronic monitoring committed fraud
In 2013, a forensic audit by the National Audit Office, Britain’s auditor general, found that the two companies providing electronic monitoring in England and Wales had overcharged the British government by “tens of millions of pounds.” The report found that both companies “were charging the Department for monitoring fees for months or years after electronic monitoring activity had ceased; over similar timescales where electronic monitoring never occurred; and multiple times for the same individual if that person was subject to more than one electronic monitoring order concurrently.”
After an investigation by the Serious Fraud Office in Britain both companies accepted responsibility for fraud offences. In 2019, one of the companies, Serco, agreed to pay a £22.9 million fine in addition to what it repaid in 2013. The other company, G4S, agreed to pay a £44.4 million fine in addition to what it repaid in 2014.
One law for the average citizen and another for corporations profiting from privatization
A worker found to have defrauded an employer would be lucky to avoid jail. Even if someone found to have defrauded an employer avoid jail time or being fired, there is no way that induvial would still have responsibility for anything related to finances.
But that’s not the case corporations proofing from the privatization of public services. Even though G4S and Serco admitted to privatization frauds involving hundreds of millions of dollars they are still getting contracts to operate privatized services – including contracts for privatized services in Canada.
Secrecy and lack of accountability surrounding privatization mean there will always be problems
The combination of the secrecy that surrounds privatization and the pressure on corporations to maximize their profits make it inevitable that there will be serious problems with some privatization schemes. It’s one of many reasons why privatizing any public service is such a bad idea. But what seems incredible is privatizing a service like electronic monitoring where public trust is so vital after it has been shown how easily serious problem can occur.